Pro Staff RF97 vs RFA

[Plush]

Hey guys,

This might be a dumb question, but is there a difference between the PSRF97 and the RF97A? Are they the same racquet? I see it advertised differently on different websites, but the specs look the same.
http://www.tennis-warehouse.com/Wilson_Pro_Staff_RF97/descpageRCWILSON-PS97RF.html
http://www.wilson.com/en-us/tennis/rackets/attacker/pro-staff-rf97-autograph

 

[ONgame]

paint job difference only

 

[Say Chi Sin Lo]

When one uses a currently endorsed paintjob, +2.0 NTRP.

 

[Plush]

Great, I have a 2.0 NTRP now

 

[Sander001]

The specs will also be different, because you know, Wilson.
"Life is like Wilson quality control, you never know what you're gonna get."

 

[MJHendrickson21]

I think there is a big difference. Better feel, more power. I fell victim to playing out of my mind when demoing this thing and not playing the same after I bought it. I'm hitting a lot of forehands long and backhands short any suggestions? Also, I can't seem to hit a forehand slice. I strung with RPM Blast 17 gauge in the mains and NXT in the crosses at 55 lbs. my previous racquet was the RF97A 2014. Thank you for your help.

 

[Soul_Evisceration]

I personally believe there are subtle differences between the 2 racquets but it could be due to the Wilson Quality Control.

I believe the 2016 looks nicer, feels better, packs a meaner punch on forehands and is more solid on backhands.

It does feel a little more demanding but I am slowly getting into my ideal perfect specs with lead + leather grip ajustments.

Still to this day, the RF97A 2016 is the best tennis racquet I have ever used.

 

[macattack]

I think there is a big difference. Better feel, more power.

I personally believe there are subtle differences between the 2 racquets but it could be due to the Wilson Quality Control.

There is no difference in the 2014 and 2016 models other than the paint. However, because of Wilson's sketchy quality control you could get a 2014 and a 2016 that feel a lot different because of differences in swing weight, static weight and balance. Hell, you could get two of the 2014s that feel very different.

I had four of the RFs (2 of the 2014 and 2 of the 2016) and the swingweight was all over the place on them. That makes a huge difference.

 

[bkr]

There is no difference in the 2014 and 2016 models other than the paint. However, because of Wilson's sketchy quality control you could get a 2014 and a 2016 that feel a lot different because of differences in swing weight, static weight and balance. Hell, you could get two of the 2014s that feel very different.

I had four of the RFs (2 of the 2014 and 2 of the 2016) and the swingweight was all over the place on them. That makes a huge difference.

I know you have lot of experience with Pro staffs so I trust your take on the versions but wondering if this goes beyond the SW as TwistWeights seems to be different as per below data.

Taken from TW:http://twu.tennis-warehouse.com/cgi-bin/twistweight.cgi

Wilson Pro Staff 97 14.52
Wilson Pro Staff 97 (2016) 14.86
Wilson Pro Staff 97 LS 13.86
Wilson Pro Staff 97 LS Black (2016) 13.06
Wilson Pro Staff 97 RF Autograph 14.9
Wilson Pro Staff 97S 14.72
Wilson Pro Staff 97S (2016) 14.64
Wilson Pro Staff RF97 Autograph (2016) 13.94
PS: I haven't tried the new one yet.

 

[macattack]

I know you have lot of experience with Pro staff so I trust your take on the versions but wondering if this goes beyond the SW as TwistWeights seems to be different as per below data.

Taken from TW:http://twu.tennis-warehouse.com/cgi-bin/twistweight.cgi

Wilson Pro Staff 97 14.52
Wilson Pro Staff 97 (2016) 14.86
Wilson Pro Staff 97 LS 13.86
Wilson Pro Staff 97 LS Black (2016) 13.06
Wilson Pro Staff 97 RF Autograph 14.9
Wilson Pro Staff 97S 14.72
Wilson Pro Staff 97S (2016) 14.64
Wilson Pro Staff RF97 Autograph (2016) 13.94
PS: I haven't tried the new one yet.

You could be right. I have not accounted for differences in twist weight. In fact, I'm not versed in how swing weight is measured. Could variances in static weight, swing weight and balance also affect twist weight?

 

[bkr]

There is a very good video published by one of the TT member on TW and there is a complicated formula on how to calculate this.I haven't bothered to look at complicated formulaes instead use the TW link to guide me on TwistWeight for different racquets.I'm also not familiar with TW calculation other than higher is not good on some racquets.

I came to know TW is a big deal when I was comparing my K Factor Wilson 6.1 to RF97 as it was puzzling to me that RF was so much tougher to maneuver compared to my 6.1 even though both the racquets total weight is close enough.Below TW numbers explained to me why they felt so different to me

Wilson KSix-One 95 (16x18) 12.31
Wilson Pro Staff 97 RF Autograph 14.9

Thanks to Racquet Tech it made sense to me.

I think Twistweight gives generic idea on how easy to maneuver the racquet but it would probably depend on other factors as well.

As per RF97 if the TW went from 14.9 to 13.9 then that would probably make the new one easier to swing compared to old one but not sure how much difference it would make swinging the racquet.

 

[macattack]

There is a very good video published by one of the TT member on TW and there is a complicated formula on how to calculate this.I haven't bothered to look at complicated formulaes instead use the TW link to guide me on TwistWeight for different racquets.I'm also not familiar with TW calculation other than higher is not good on some racquets.

I came to know TW is a big deal when I was comparing my K Factor Wilson 6.1 to RF97 as it was puzzling to me that RF was so much tougher to maneuver compared to my 6.1 even though both the racquets total weight is close enough.Below TW numbers explained to me why they felt so different to me

Wilson KSix-One 95 (16x18) 12.31
Wilson Pro Staff 97 RF Autograph 14.9

Thanks to Racquet Tech it made sense to me.

I think Twistweight gives generic idea on how easy to maneuver the racquet but it would probably depend on other factors as well.

As per RF97 if the TW went from 14.9 to 13.9 then that would probably make the new one easier to swing compared to old one but not sure how much difference it would make swinging the racquet.

I've seen that video. Good stuff. I know what twist weight is and how it affects maneuverability, I'm just not sure how to calculate it or if variances in weight, SW and balance would affect TW. But yes, if TW on the two RF models are consistently different then that would change things.

 

[xFullCourtTenniSx]

You could be right. I have not accounted for differences in twist weight. In fact, I'm not versed in how swing weight is measured. Could variances in static weight, swing weight and balance also affect twist weight?

Twistweight is increased by having more weight in the sides. Variances in other specs COULD have an affect, but easily might not (like balance or weight for swingweight). If a racket is much more head heavy than another of the same model, it doesn't necessarily mean the swingweight is different. If the more head heavy racket has less weight in the handle, especially at 10 cm from the buttcap, then the swingweight will be the same but will end up more head heavy. But if both weight and balance are off, it's harder to have the swingweight match. Not impossible, just harder. For twistweight, there's less of a correlation. Two rackets could be massively off in weight, swingweight, balance and still have the same twistweight because as long as you have the same amount of weight away from the vertical axis of the racket, you'll still get the same swingweight. More of the weight could be distributed to the top, or the bottom, but as long as the amount to the sides is right. Also, given that the length of the horizontal axis is so short, and there's so little weight along that axis (at least at the extremes), it's much harder to make a drastic difference in twistweight. But I'm sure Wilson QC would still find a way to surprise us all.

tl;dr Variances COULD affect it, but there's literally no legitimate correlation if the racket stays within QC range. But again, Wilson QC always finds ways to surprise and troll us.

 

[macattack]

Twistweight is increased by having more weight in the sides. Variances in other specs COULD have an affect, but easily might not (like balance or weight for swingweight). If a racket is much more head heavy than another of the same model, it doesn't necessarily mean the swingweight is different. If the more head heavy racket has less weight in the handle, especially at 10 cm from the buttcap, then the swingweight will be the same but will end up more head heavy. But if both weight and balance are off, it's harder to have the swingweight match. Not impossible, just harder. For twistweight, there's less of a correlation. Two rackets could be massively off in weight, swingweight, balance and still have the same twistweight because as long as you have the same amount of weight away from the vertical axis of the racket, you'll still get the same swingweight. More of the weight could be distributed to the top, or the bottom, but as long as the amount to the sides is right. Also, given that the length of the horizontal axis is so short, and there's so little weight along that axis (at least at the extremes), it's much harder to make a drastic difference in twistweight. But I'm sure Wilson QC would still find a way to surprise us all.

tl;dr Variances COULD affect it, but there's literally no legitimate correlation if the racket stays within QC range. But again, Wilson QC always finds ways to surprise and troll us.

Thank you!

 

[xFullCourtTenniSx]

I know you have lot of experience with Pro staffs so I trust your take on the versions but wondering if this goes beyond the SW as TwistWeights seems to be different as per below data.

Taken from TW:http://twu.tennis-warehouse.com/cgi-bin/twistweight.cgi

Wilson Pro Staff 97 14.52
Wilson Pro Staff 97 (2016) 14.86
Wilson Pro Staff 97 LS 13.86
Wilson Pro Staff 97 LS Black (2016) 13.06
Wilson Pro Staff 97 RF Autograph 14.9
Wilson Pro Staff 97S 14.72
Wilson Pro Staff 97S (2016) 14.64
Wilson Pro Staff RF97 Autograph (2016) 13.94
PS: I haven't tried the new one yet.

According to an article I read a little while back, if you're a high level player (I believe they used D1 college players for the test, could've extended to D2), you'll notice a difference in swingweight of as little as 5% (so for the RF97 listed here, it would be a difference of 0.745 kgcm^2, while the RF97A would be 0.697 kgcm^2).

Of course, I'm pretty sure a lot of these players use twistweights around 13-14 kgcm^2 unless they've added a LOT of weight to the sides.

Normal players I believe can notice a difference of 10%, or at least upper intermediates (something around 4.0 and 4.5). Obviously, a difference of 10% is pretty large. That's over 1.25 kgcm^2 for any racket. That's like 8g to 3&9 for a Wilson 90. So yeah, pretty easy to notice that.

By the way, the way to calculate increase in twistweight is the same as calculating the increase in swingweight. It's m*d^2, where m is mass of added weight in kg, and d is the distance from the axis in cm. In swingweight, the axis is 10cm from the buttcap (or 4 inches), and for twistweight it's the vertical axis through the racket, so the line down center of the stringbed through the handle of the racket. I used the approximate estimation of the sides of a Wilson 90 being 25 cm apart, so 12.5 cm from the side to the center of the strings.

 

[Say Chi Sin Lo]

I personally believe there are subtle differences between the 2 racquets but it could be due to the Wilson Quality Control.

I believe the 2016 looks nicer, feels better, packs a meaner punch on forehands and is more solid on backhands.

It does feel a little more demanding but I am slowly getting into my ideal perfect specs with lead + leather grip ajustments.

Still to this day, the RF97A 2016 is the best tennis racquet I have ever used.

No, they're the same.

 

[macattack]

No, they're the same.

And yet...None of them are the same!

 

[Say Chi Sin Lo]

And yet...None of them are the same!

Mine are, it's called matching.

 

[macattack]

Mine are, it's called matching.

Mine are as well. I was just making a bad joke about Wilson QC.

 

[Plush]

I've never customized my racquets in the past, and I currently don't have anything to customize my racquets with. (lead tape, silicone, grips, etc.) If Wilson quality control is really that poor, would you recommend I customize to even out the variation more? If so, how would I check to see if my customization is having the desired effect (weight, balance, etc.)? I don't have any machines that would do that for me.

Also, is it really worth splurging and getting the newer version for $30 more?